Limitations on human comprehension

I don't think there is a limit because I have no idea what it would mean for something to be incomprehensible. I know I might not be able to grasp something, but that something should be such that no one could ever grasp it? I don't know what that would be.

ragarth said:

Do you think there is or is not a limit to humanity's comprehension of the universe, and why?

Click to expand...

Of course I do, limitation is a constant like change...

Our brains have a finite number of neurons. We do continue to make synaptic connections even in adulthood, but we don't grow more neurons. This implies to me that there is a limit on our mental power.

Though I suspect our species could evolve larger brains. In an information-driven environment, it should be advantageous to have a brain with more neurons and more computing ability. On the other hand, that doesn't translate to greater fecundity. In most all developed countries, individuals with higher intelligence have fewer offspring than others. So the classic rules of natural selection may not apply.

Because we are made in God's image. <G>

ragarth said:

Do you think there is or is not a limit to humanity's comprehension of the universe, and why?

Click to expand...

Probably not. There may be a limit to what we can observe, but that is a different matter.

For instance, if there was some cosmos prior to our current post-inflation cosmos, we might not be able to know much about what it was like. But this would only limit our knowledge -- it wouldn't be a limit on the powers of human reason.


eudaimonia,

Mark

ragarth said:

Humanity has achieved many things through science and technology, much of which would have been unimaginable 150 years ago. A recurring theme I've seen recently on this site is the idea that there is a limit to what humanity can comprehend and understand. Do you think there is or is not a limit to humanity's comprehension of the universe, and why?

Click to expand...

I do not think there is any potential limit so in the end I believe humanity will know everything there is to about the universe, possibly the multiverse (if such exists)- provided Humanity doesnt wipe itself out before then.
And from such knowledge comes power.

but such an achievement must be progressed to over time, so we are limited now, but we will be less limited tomorrow.

jayem said:

Our brains have a finite number of neurons. We do continue to make synaptic connections even in adulthood, but we don't grow more neurons. This implies to me that there is a limit on our mental power.

Though I suspect our species could evolve larger brains. In an information-driven environment, it should be advantageous to have a brain with more neurons and more computing ability. On the other hand, that doesn't translate to greater fecundity. In most all developed countries, individuals with higher intelligence have fewer offspring than others. So the classic rules of natural selection may not apply.

Click to expand...

however unlike other species we have the potential to actively modify our bodies, either thru manipulation or augmentation from both biological and mechanical perspectives. And that we can also create external repositories that can store and calculate data to augment our functionality in life.

There do appear to be limitations to what we can ultimately comprehend.

As a poster above has indicated, our brains (while significantly more advanced than that of other species) is limited not only by both the number of neurons and their synaptic connections, but is also limited in time and space, implying that our cognitive capacities, including our ability to comprehend all things, is limited by the same factors, to a degree. In addition to this, our senses are limited to a mere five of all the possible sensory data in the universe (presumably because those five within their respective thresholds are all that we really require to survive). Much of our perception of the world is not necessarily reflective of reality in the purest sense, but is a personal process, involving considerable construction occurring as a result of our brain filling in the gaps - hence we experience sensory illusions. We aren't even aware of much of the data that we really do process; it does not enter our immediate attention since it is not relevant to our immediate needs or wants and would simply crowd a short term memory which is itself limited to a mere 15-20 seconds and 7-9 bits of information at a time (without rehearsal). Comprehending the infinite and all that is would seemingly require an equally infinite capacity to do so.

Given the temporal nature of our cerebral matter and the finite capacity of our psyche, it seems highly unlikely that the finite mind shall ever come to full and perfect knowledge of the infinite in its infinity.

That is not to say, however, that our knowledge of ourselves and the universe will not greatly expand in the future as it has accelerated since the past. Our theories of what is behind the ticking of the universe will continue to go on, becoming weirder, more refined and elegant... but an infinite knowledge of the infinite all? Perhaps not in our present state of the human condition - which has been the source of strength for our learning thus far, and yet simultaneously the limitation of our incapacity to know it all.

Given that this is a philosophy board, and philosophy does mean 'love of wisdom', I would suggest that wisdom comes from acknowledging one's own limitations.

Brains are like computers in a way. But they are different in that they can forget things without knowing, unlike computers. I think a human has no limit to what they can learn, but maybe a limit to what they can retain in conscious memory.

One can comprehend things in different ways, there is an infinite way of veiwing different things, and so many ways we will never see things.
I think the human race learns things as a whole, some people focus on space others on gardening or cooking, etc.

I think there is stuff we'll never know for sure, but that's the fun in it - trying to figure it out. Anyway, there is no way to know for certain that the stuff we know already is correct.

I think there are a few things that we cannot comprehend. If you believe string theory; I think multiple dimensions are hard to grasp. Can anyone imagine a 7th dimension?

I think it stems from having nothing to compare it too. Like living in a 2 dimensional world and trying to think of a third dimension (search 'the flat people').

Eudaimonist said:

Probably not. There may be a limit to what we can observe, but that is a different matter.

For instance, if there was some cosmos prior to our current post-inflation cosmos, we might not be able to know much about what it was like. But this would only limit our knowledge -- it wouldn't be a limit on the powers of human reason.

eudaimonia,

Mark

Click to expand...

I agree completely with this, and is similar to how I was going to respond before I read this post. There are certain things we may never know (or we might), but that counts against are ability to observe, not comprehend.

29apples said:

I think there are a few things that we cannot comprehend. If you believe string theory; I think multiple dimensions are hard to grasp. Can anyone imagine a 7th dimension?

I think it stems from having nothing to compare it too. Like living in a 2 dimensional world and trying to think of a third dimension (search 'the flat people').

Click to expand...

It's possible, but if humanity tries to progress in such a way to connect their minds to powerful computers, they may acquire the ability to visualize things beyond what we can visualize now. That technology is almost certainly possible if we decide to go that route (and we already have begun to do so).

of course humans will never know everything. even if they know all there is that can be known, they'll always be in the dark about the existence of the possibly unknowable, things that cannot be known by definition.

so, yeah, that's probably the most simple limit you can get. humans can't know what, by definition, can't be known.

of course you could question whether things that can't be known actually exist, but that can't be known either.

even beyond perception, there are limits to what people can know. human reason can only go so far.

You're positing a Catch-22. If I say we can come to comprehend everything, of necessity I mean everything we can comprehend. If I say we can't, then just what is it we can't?
My sus[icion is that we are being presumtuous to assume we are the most intelligent life form in, or beyond, the universe.